4.2 Article

Genetic stability analysis of introduced Betula pendula, Betula kirghisorum, and Betula pubescens families in saline-alkali soil of northeastern China

期刊

SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF FOREST RESEARCH
卷 29, 期 7, 页码 639-649

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS AS
DOI: 10.1080/02827581.2014.960892

关键词

Betula pendula; stability; variation; half-sib families; salt-tolerant; introduction

类别

资金

  1. Breeding Technology Research of Valuable Timber Species [2012BAD01B05]
  2. Excellent Tree Selected and Seed Orchard Technology in Birch [2012BAD21B02]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Approximately, 20% of arable land worldwide, as well as nearly half of irrigated land, is subjected to salt stress. Osmotic stress and ion toxicity due to saline soils cause low crop yields. In this study, we introduced 18 families of salt-tolerant birch (Betula pendula Roth., Betula kirghisorum Sav.-Ryczg., and Betula pubescens Ehrh) into five high-salinity locations in northeastern China and evaluated their survival abilities. We also analyzed variation and stability of genotype-environment interactions of the different families under an additive main effect and multiplicative interaction model. Survival rate analysis indicated that the introduced families were well adapted to the high-salinity environments, whereas native families died. Variation analysis revealed significant differences between location x family interaction mean values for height and basic stem diameter (BSD), suggesting that most genotypes responded differently to different sites. The heritability of tree height and BSD at different sites varied from 0.416 to 0.940, with the coefficient of phenotypic variation ranging from 9.88% to 35.53%. Stability analysis indicated that some families had high tree heights but were sensitive to environmental conditions, whereas others were resistant but had average tree heights. These results suggest that families should be bred in various habitats to assess growth under favorable and unfavorable environments.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据